JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for DC-REGISTRY Archives


DC-REGISTRY Archives

DC-REGISTRY Archives


DC-REGISTRY@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

DC-REGISTRY Home

DC-REGISTRY Home

DC-REGISTRY  August 2000

DC-REGISTRY August 2000

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Strawman for the status of DC tokens

From:

Thomas Baker <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Thomas Baker <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 11 Aug 2000 18:36:11 +0200 (MET DST)

Content-Type:

TEXT/PLAIN

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (109 lines)

Dear all,

I would like to offer the following strawman for discussion on this
list and at DC-8 in Ottawa.

Tom

--------

A TIERED MODEL FOR THE STATUS OF DUBLIN CORE TOKENS

Thomas Baker

Version: 11 August 2000

This short paper is intended as a strawman for discussion on the levels
of approval status for DCMI metadata tokens.  The term "tokens" is
being used here as a catch-all term for metadata words such as elements
and qualifiers (see [1]).  The context of these tokens is a registry
based on the Resource Description Format, which supports the modeling
of assertions.  The default assertion considered here involves the DCMI
Usage Committee saying something about a token's status.  The DCMI
Registry Working Group will need to consider whether working groups of
the DCMI (such as DC-Education or DC-Government) should likewise make
assertions about the status of tokens.  Whether the tokens in question
must be in a namespace maintained by DCMI is also a question beyond the
scope of this brief paper.

Local Tokens

    Any project or implementation may assert that a local token is
    based on or related to a Dublin Core token and make this asserted
    relation known by publishing the token in an RDF schema and
    communicating the URI of the token to DCMI.  DCMI will acknowledge
    the assertion by publishing this link in its registry.  Most links
    will never be reviewed by DCMI, so such a back-link will not imply
    DCMI endorsement of any kind.

    Registration provides a public record of tokens in use by local
    projects, encourages the reuse of tokens by others, and promotes an
    ongoing process of standardisation and harmonisation based on
    usage.

    As a feature of the RDF schema format, each registered element and
    token will have a URI plus a name and definition in any language
    (not necessarily English).

Proposed Tokens

    Any implementor of a Dublin-Core-based schema may put forward a
    token for review by the DCMI Usage Committee by providing it with a
    machine-readable name along with a label and definition in clear
    and understandable English, putting it into an RDF schema published
    on the Web, and communicating the URI of the token to DCMI.  A
    Local Token put forward for recognition as a Conforming
    Token is called a Proposed Token.

    A proposal is considered to be "well-formed" if it describes the
    token using the expected style and template, possibly with a few
    well-chosen examples.  Proposals for qualifiers must specify the
    element intended to be qualified.  Proposed tokens continue to
    reside in the namespace of the proposer.  

Conforming Tokens

    The DCMI Usage Committee will evaluate Proposed Tokens against the
    grammatical principles of Dublin Core.  Tokens judged by the Usage
    Committee to substantially meet these principles will be assigned a
    token in a DCMI-maintained namespace.  The Usage Committee will
    specify whether a token is an element or a qualifier (element
    refinement or value encoding).

Non-Conforming Tokens

    Local Tokens that have been reviewed and found _not_ to be in
    conformance with principles may be explicitly flagged as
    Non-Conforming if the Usage Committee is so inclined.  In the case
    of such a verdict, a summary of Usage Committee comments may be
    appropriate.

Recommended Tokens

    Any Proposed Token may be promoted to the status of Recommended
    Token if it has been shown to be of general use and broad
    interest across disciplines.  The DCMI Usage Committee may want
    to recommend that multiple Conforming Tokens of similar scope
    be combined into one single Recommended Token.

Obsolete Tokens

    Over time, the meaning of a token may shift through usage.  In
    such cases, the DCMI Usage Committee should consider revising
    the definition of a token to match the changed usage.
    Alternatively, tokens may become superseded, deprecated, or
    obsolete.  Such tokens will remain the Dublin Core registry as
    Obsolete Tokens as they may be needed to interpret legacy
    metadata.

[1] http://www.gmd.de/People/Thomas.Baker/DC-Grammar.html

_______________________________________________________________________________
Dr. Thomas Baker                                            [log in to unmask]
GMD Library
Schloss Birlinghoven                                           +49-2241-14-2352
53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany                              fax +49-2241-14-2619



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JISCMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2014
January 2014
September 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
March 2012
February 2012
December 2011
October 2011
September 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
June 2010
May 2010
October 2009
July 2009
February 2009
December 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
October 2007
August 2007
June 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
December 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
June 2006
April 2006
March 2006
January 2006
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
August 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
February 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
January 2001
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
April 2000
February 2000
December 1999


WWW.JISCMAIL.AC.UK

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager